Wait. You mean the most simple and easy to follow doctrines like being kind to one another, turning the other cheek, not showboating your righteousness, not judging, etc. etc., are often ignored? Who would have thunk it?

Ask the Canaanites how religion made for good neighbors, or the Jews, the Gnostics, the Muslims in Spain, the Cathars, the Catholics in England, the Mormons in Missouri. et al how religion makes folks so great neighbors.

I believe that the study was done in earnest, and maybe it is instructive that a lot of people are hypocrites.

I spent a lot of time reading different religious texts and found a lot in those different texts to inspire me. When my focus was on that, I believe that my general attitude toward others was better than when it had been a while. It took my focus off of me and onto principles that I consider more universal. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing in itself.

Oh please. Next you'll be telling us that capitalism is the belief that there is something noble and sacred about allowing the ruthless, opportunisitic fortunate barely restrained tyranny over the less ruthless, the less opportunistic and the less fortunate.

skipjack:OTOH the ridicule those that disagree with you proverb is in full force.

We could be intellectual cowards, wringing our hands and pretending that all ideas about the world are equally valid and immune to criticism because they might be quite deeply held by people and we wouldn't want to offend them. Or we could heap ridicule on ridiculous beliefs where we find them.

Any system that teaches good morals can help a person love their neighbor. The operative word here is "can". There are jerks of every stripe and sect. A jerk who says he believes in a god is still a jerk. A jerk who does not believe in a god is still a jerk.

In my case, my religious upbringing helped me. I was lucky enough not to be raised by jerks, and to grow up with a truly loving minister (he was a leftover hippie who took Jesus' command to love incredibly seriously. He was awesome).

I sincerely doubt that pro-social behavior is something that can be learned. I think that human beings, by and large, instinctively engage in pro-social behaviors. There are inherent conflicts with our limitations in that regard (we're great in societies of 20ish people, we start failing in societies of thousands, and it gets all farked up when you try and build a society of millions), but that's not because we need to learn to "love our neighbor". We simply need to recognize that these strangers are our neighbor.

We are social animals, and we are inherently compassionate and kind to our peers. Those that are not are deviants, and I do not believe that education fixes it- it's a biological issue that must be treated.

The number 7 and the letter Q!:Any system that teaches good morals can help a person love their neighbor. The operative word here is "can". There are jerks of every stripe and sect. A jerk who says he believes in a god is still a jerk. A jerk who does not believe in a god is still a jerk.

In my case, my religious upbringing helped me. I was lucky enough not to be raised by jerks, and to grow up with a truly loving minister (he was a leftover hippie who took Jesus' command to love incredibly seriously. He was awesome).

By your own words, it wasn't your religious upbringing that helped you, it was that you are simply not a jerk. Or possibly that you were raised by people who are not jerks. But the religious aspect has nothing to do with it.

Ennuipoet:Ask the Canaanites how religion made for good neighbors, or the Jews, the Gnostics, the Muslims in Spain, the Cathars, the Catholics in England, the Mormons in Missouri. et al how religion makes folks so great neighbors.

In each of those cases the dominate religious group so loved their neighbors that they practiced "harsh conversion" techniques.

Doesn't seem to be what the study found. They even included non-religious in there, and I'd bet everyone is just as likely to fall into this. They were told they had something in common with the other person they were interacting with. That will make people more generous and trusting of the other person. I doubt it even has to be religion. You could probably do this with hobbies and get a similar result.

Doesn't seem to be what the study found. They even included non-religious in there, and I'd bet everyone is just as likely to fall into this. They were told they had something in common with the other person they were interacting with. That will make people more generous and trusting of the other person. I doubt it even has to be religion. You could probably do this with hobbies and get a similar result.

A big, charbroiled and juicy hunk of THIS, served to everyone in the thread.

t3knomanser:The number 7 and the letter Q!: Any system that teaches good morals can help a person love their neighbor

I sincerely doubt that pro-social behavior is something that can be learned. I think that human beings, by and large, instinctively engage in pro-social behaviors. There are inherent conflicts with our limitations in that regard (we're great in societies of 20ish people, we start failing in societies of thousands, and it gets all farked up when you try and build a society of millions), but that's not because we need to learn to "love our neighbor". We simply need to recognize that these strangers are our neighbor.

We are social animals, and we are inherently compassionate and kind to our peers. Those that are not are deviants, and I do not believe that education fixes it- it's a biological issue that must be treated.

Interesting idea. I honestly haven't studied human instinctual behavior in detail (I'm an English teacher) but now I've got something to look up online when the kids are napping. Thanks.

My pappy used to say "follow the money" about EVERYTHING in life. Roads, schools, businesses, newspapers, milk, canned goods, religion--freakin' everything. He said money explains all human behavior.

But he was right. Money is the root of the hate throughout history. Every religion may want to do its version of the most good, but knows deep down you need money to do it, so they tribalize their thought processes to keep their flocks in line--and donating money.

I've always taught my kids we're Catholic because that's how I was raised and I'm not really in the mood to learn a new set of rules. But if they want to go Lutheran or something else that's not an outright cult (like Scientology) they won't get any weird family fighting from me.

The theatrical and made-up procedural rules is what gets people bent out of joint against each other, and all of them should be classified as ethnic & historical traditions, rather than edicts from God justifying the smiting (or just snottiness) towards one's neighbors.

mgshamster:The number 7 and the letter Q!: Any system that teaches good morals can help a person love their neighbor. The operative word here is "can". There are jerks of every stripe and sect. A jerk who says he believes in a god is still a jerk. A jerk who does not believe in a god is still a jerk.

In my case, my religious upbringing helped me. I was lucky enough not to be raised by jerks, and to grow up with a truly loving minister (he was a leftover hippie who took Jesus' command to love incredibly seriously. He was awesome).

By your own words, it wasn't your religious upbringing that helped you, it was that you are simply not a jerk. Or possibly that you were raised by people who are not jerks. But the religious aspect has nothing to do with it.

I wouldn't say that it had nothing to do with it. I would say that it was a great context for learning what I learned. I don't think it's the only context where a person could learn it, though.

This reminds me of a pair of other recent papers. One was the recent study looking at how political affiliation affects charitable donations, finding that liberals and conservatives donate equally, but to different organizations. Conservatives tending to donate to religious organizations, like their own congregation, that serve typically to benefit the in-group while liberals tend to donate more to secular organizations that tend to help in-group and out-group equally (and also that people tend to donate less overall when the opposite party occupies the White House). The other was a study looking at whether or not people perceive humanity as their in-group or not, finding - among other things - that those who identify all of humanity as members of their in-group tend to donate more to humanitarian relief efforts. Citations for both are below, in case anyone is interested:

Margolis, M., & Sances, M. (2012). Who Really Gives? Partisanship and Charitable Giving in the United States. Partisanship and Charitable Giving in the United States (September 4, 2012).

McFarland, S., Webb, M., & Brown, D. (2012). All Humanity Is My Ingroup: A Measure and Studies of Identification With All Humanity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(5), 830-853.

incendi:UberDave: ou mean the most simple and easy to follow doctrines like being kind to one another, turning the other cheek, not showboating your righteousness, not judging, etc. etc., are often ignored?

Simple, yes. Easy to follow, not so much.

But yes, it seems many Christians are much more concerned with other people's sinfulness while ignoring one of the central tenets of Jesus's teachings: "Don't be an asshole."

But they only do that because they "love" you and want to see you saved as well. Or some kind of bullshiat like that.

incendi:UberDave: ou mean the most simple and easy to follow doctrines like being kind to one another, turning the other cheek, not showboating your righteousness, not judging, etc. etc., are often ignored?

Simple, yes. Easy to follow, not so much.

But yes, it seems many Christians are much more concerned with other people's sinfulness while ignoring one of the central tenets of Jesus's teachings: "Don't be an asshole."

This is so true. Jesus also cared about the poor and the outcast which is polar opposite to what many churches are teaching. Like the "mega Churches" in the South. "God want's you to be successful!"... and give more money to the church so the pastor can get a new Rolls.

t3knomanser:skipjack: OTOH the ridicule those that disagree with you proverb is in full force.

We could be intellectual cowards, wringing our hands and pretending that all ideas about the world are equally valid and immune to criticism because they might be quite deeply held by people and we wouldn't want to offend them. Or we could heap ridicule on ridiculous beliefs where we find them.

The latter is far more honest.

It's not more honest to ridicule those that disagree with you, it's a response by someone insecure in their own beliefs.

Doesn't seem to be what the study found. They even included non-religious in there, and I'd bet everyone is just as likely to fall into this. They were told they had something in common with the other person they were interacting with. That will make people more generous and trusting of the other person. I doubt it even has to be religion. You could probably do this with hobbies and get a similar result.